Column on Ethics in Panic

Ethics in Panic

Tibor R. Machan

Some people I have known for ages, who have held firm, as I have, to the
conviction that only those public policies are worth one’s support that
champion liberty above everything else, appear to me to be shaking their
heads just now. They are even talking about how their earlier position may
be some kind of idealism or utopianism in need of moderation.

But support for the free society is not idealism or utopianism. It’s the
recognition that men and women live best if their communities are governed
by the principles of individual rights, to life, liberty, private
property, and by the complete renunciation of coercive force among people.

The perfect is, indeed, the enemy of the good and aiming for perfection,
some kind of final answer, in human affairs is a mistake—maybe once time
ends that will be reasonable to seek but while history is still in
process, the best answers will always just be the most up to date, never
the last.

Anyway, the current economic fiasco has shaken some people’s confidence in
the soundness of the free society. To me that’s akin to being shaken in
one’s conviction in an honest and loving marriage because, well, they are
rare. Free markets do not produce the mess that we are witnessing. Free
market champions have forecast this mess for over a century, making the
point that the more we permit government to attempt to direct the economy,
the more we are inviting catastrophe, just as this has happened elsewhere.
The apparent exceptions occur where for a while some nearly free good,
like oil or agricultural abundance, made it possible to be wealthy without
free minds and free markets. Even a prison can flourish if supplied with
innumerable valuables no one needs to think about and work for.

But that is not the normal state of things in human communities. So the
principle that men and women must be free of government
regimentation—which is, if you think about it, the regimentation of some
men and women of all the rest of them—must not be compromised, let alone
abandoned. For a while it is possible to fake reality, to have a measure
of economic prosperity without freedom but in time that comes to a
screeching halt. Trying to live off money that is borrowed without
collateral, without the realistic prospect of paying it back, and with the
groundless hope that yet unborn generations will simply take on the debt
without protest, is a blueprint for economic disaster. And to try to cope
with the disaster with more of the same is catastrophic.

But panic tends to test people’s resolve. Integrity is tough to maintain
when the fruits of years and years of economic malpractice become
unavoidable anymore. This is true, of course, in all cases of doing
violence of good sense, to decency, to virtue, to justice. Such
accommodating, “pragmatic” ways tend mainly to beget even worse
malpractice.

An when one witnesses the few VIPs in one’s community—who gave at least
lip service to the principles of the free market cave in before a bunch of
bullies in Washington (and, yes, California Representative Henry Waxman,
in front of whom Alan Greenspan betrayed his supposedly free market ideas,
is the fiercest bully on the Hill)—no wonder that one’s resolve is
weakened. That’s especially so when one’s confidence in liberty is mostly
based on common sense, something that tends to become brittle when facing
the ill effects of misguided political economy.

It is interesting that many people haven’t a clue as to what alternative
to the free market they should support but announce simply that something
needs to be done in Washington, the very place where all of this got
started to go south. It is as if when a medical charlatan makes a royal
mess of one’s health one insisted to going back to that quack for
emergency treatment!

No. The answer is to ride this out with as little reliance on the
policies that brought it all about, namely, government meddling in the
economy. Let the referees of the game learn to do their proper job, then
let the athletes resume play free of bureaucratic interference, instead of
making things worse by inserting themselves even more into something they
know nothing about.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Column on Ethics in Panic

  1. Very good article Mr. Machan. I have learned much from reading this blog.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s